Daily Times

What if this democratic experience fails? Would the present system work where the basic ingredients necessary for a rule based and merit oriented governance are amiss? The above questions beg answers if we are to see a new dawn in politics and governance. But before we answer these questions we need to identify those factors that render our democratic system unviable. A Deus ex Machina approach to solving of our problems has given us a messiah complex as a nation wherein we keep waiting for a proverbial Go dot who would descend from the heavens to resolve all our issues. This proclivity has turned us into hero worshippers who slavishly follow a strong leader irrespective of the merit of his or her leadership skills. What could ever cure us of this malady?

Oliver E. Williamsen in his seminal essay “The Institutions and Governance of Economic Development and Reform” writes that good plans generally wither on the wine of personal caprices and whims of those who occupy strategic policymaking positions. He also suggests an antidote to the above disease in the form of institutions. He stresses the importance of the institutions in making the rational decisions but rues the fact that the individual and bureaucratic leadership’s fiat tramples roughshod over the institutional decision making. Over a period of time this personalised and whimsical model develops a mind-set that abhors nurturing of institutions viewing those as curbs on the monarchical freedom to take decisions. Pakistan is a classic exemplar of non-institutionalised decision making, as over decades of bad governance an entire eco-system of personalised decision making has been developed that purposely stifles the development of decision making institutions.

One could quote several examples where an unholy alliance between non-elected bureaucracies and interest groups have put paid to the development of institutions where an effective political oversight could have yielded excellent results in the national interest. Our institutions like parliament and its sub committees have never been taken seriously by those stakeholders whose conduct is being scrutinised by these committees. Due to lack of expertise and the dedication to oversee the conduct of vital national institutions like military, judiciary, academia, media, and bureaucracy the Parliament has never been able to provide the guidance and leadership that the people mandated it to exercise in the larger national interest. Though institutions cited above deserve their own independence yet the lack of parliamentary oversight which in fact is the people’s oversight leaves the national governance fragmented without due synergy.

PTI recently aroused the ire of the masses against an iniquitous system and has charged their political sensibilities to a feverish pitch

Our present parliamentary system which makes governance contingent upon the good humour of a truckload of the electables in a winning coalition, who need to be plied with the necessary goodies as a recompense for their electoral loyalty, is inherently unstable. A system of spoils and rewards for the political buccaneers and carpet baggers who only enter the electoral fray to line their pockets perpetually keeps a Prime Minister on the tenterhooks till their thirst for power is not slaked. An entire Balochistan Assembly comprising ministers is a comical reminder of this malaise. Why do our vital foreign policy, defence, economic, health, and education decisions not go through an institutionalised process, duly scrutinised by the relevant ministries, government nominated committees and the parliament? The beau sabreurs of institutionalised decision making are the experts in the relevant fields and the government servants who debate every issue threadbare before recommending workable options to national leadership.

In the field of defence and national security, the forums like Cabinet Committee of National Security, National Security Directorate, and Defence Ministry do not have the right intellectual muscles to proffer right choices for decision making. None of the above have properly resourced staff comprising experts in the relevant fields who could put forward the best options for decision makers. As a consequence the national leadership already enamoured of a personalised decision making does what it deems best, as per its prejudices and narrow interests. Same is the case with the Foreign Ministry where the expert advice is rendered albeit diffused; a classic case of paralysis by analysis. Foreign Ministry’s inputs are relegated to auxiliary suggestions to be grafted suitably over the dictates of the executive heavily influenced by the military and intelligence community’s inputs. The economic decision making is also fragmented with Ministry of Finance, State Bank, and Planning Commission jostling for influence without a coherent input producing forum.

The second ingredient after the effective institutions is the discipline which contributes towards national development and good governance. It includes moral, mental, fiscal, and traffic discipline. A nation without discipline is nothing better than a herd of cattle adrift. Even if we have institutions we cannot go very far if we do not internalise disciplined behaviour, which besides regulating our conduct improves work ethics and productivity. Discipline in fact is the underpinning of the institutionalised governance. The willing submission of one’s personal interests to the collective interests directly contributes towards strengthening of national institutions. Do we have these two attributes? The answer sadly is no. The two centre-left parties that caught the popular fancies so far in our democratic journey are PPP under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and PTI under Imran Khan. Both parties have aroused public sentiments, especially amongst the youth and working classes. Both have sensitised the masses of their rights and the injustices meted out to them by an unjust system of governance.

The trouble begins when one finds that none of the two above mentioned political parties have taken the trouble to educate the masses of their responsibilities and obligations to the state and the society. PTI recently aroused the ire of the masses against an iniquitous system and has charged their political sensibilities to a feverish pitch. Now such awareness and anger in a disciplined society such as post war Germany in 1945 and Russia in 1917 ushered in systemic changes for the betterment of those nations. Would an undisciplined nation like Pakistan with weak institutions reap the same fruits of a systemic change with PTI in the catbird seat? No; not without the requisite discipline and strong institutions based on rule of law. If the present political experiment also fails then a republican system based on a national unity government comprising the best and the brightest might be the only answer to our governance problem.

A government comprising all segments of the society and all professions with the active support of judiciary and the Army can perform outstandingly provided it rules by law and justice leveraging the expertise in all spheres of governance. It is this rule of law by a government that cannot be politically blackmailed that can instil the requisite discipline in a nation still used to an unruliness in personal and collective conduct like in primordial societies. Some political scientists consider Chinese and Russian systems interesting variants of a republicanism tailored to the specific needs of those societies. That no mass revolts have taken place against those systems and their socio-economic progress has beaten those of established models of democracies is a food for thought for our political scientists too. A republican government of national unity would need a decent tenure to help create and stabilise an institutionalised governance model besides socialising our public into a disciplined mode of individual and collective behaviour.

Unless we learn to educate, heal, enlighten, and discipline our undisciplined hordes, which are threatening to devour whatever resources this poor nation generates for their welfare we would keep playing this musical chairs game of political change for eternity without bringing any meaningful change in the lives of people. The surge of adrenalin in the wake of PTI victory at the hustings should not blind us to the real Achilles’ heel of our polity, lack of discipline and non-institutionalised governance. A Republican mode of governance might well prove to be the final option if the present political populism fails to channelise the mass movement’s energy into a disciplined and institutionalised national conduct and governance.

The writer is a PhD scholar at NUST; e mail rwjanj@hotmail.com

Published in Daily Times, July 30^th 2018.